EPA 910/9-89-006
Puget Sound Estuary Program
EVERETT HARBOR ACTION PROGRAM:
1989 ACTION PLAN
March 1989
-------
PTI Environmental Services
3625 - 132nd Avenue SE
Suite 301
Bellevue, Washington 98006
EVERETT HARBOR ACTION PROGRAM:
1989 ACTION PLAN
For
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10 - Office of Puget Sound
Seattle, Washington 98101
EPA 910/9/-89-006
EPA Contract No. 68D80085
PTI Contract No. C744-04
March 1989
-------
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES iii
LIST OF TABLES iv
GLOSSARY AND LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ix
INTRODUCTION 1
OVERVIEW OF EVERETT HARBOR AND ITS TOXIC CONTAMINATION
PROBLEMS 1
EVERETT HARBOR ACTION PROGRAM 4
Implementation of Action Plans 4
Past Accomplishments 6
TECHNICAL APPROACH 7
Identification and Ranking of Problem Areas 7
Identification of Potential Contaminant Sources 9
1989 ACTION PLAN FOR EVERETT HARBOR 14
COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMS AND PLANS 14
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund 14
Proposed U.S. Navy Homeport for a Carrier Battle Group 14
Washington Department of Ecology 15
Snohomish Conservation District 16
Snohomish Health District 17
City of Everett 17
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority 18
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Puget Sound Dredged
Disposal Analysis 18
Port of Everett 19
Paine Field Cleanup Committee 19
SITE-SPECIFIC ACTION PLAN 19
REFERENCES 22
APPENDIX A: SOURCE EVALUATION SUMMARY
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Everett Harbor and lower Snohomish River project area 2
2 Elements of the Everett Harbor Action Program 5
3 Environmental indicators used to define problem areas of sediment
contamination and biological effects 8
4 Problem areas and problem stations in the Everett Harbor project area 10
5 Locations of potential sources of contamination in the Everett Harbor
project area 12
6 Locations of drain sampling stations, industrial discharge outfalls,
CSOs, and storm drains in the East Waterway study area 13
111
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Site-specific action plan for Everett Harbor priority problem areas 20
IV
-------
GLOSSARY AND LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AGENCY AND
CAC
COE
Ecology
EHAT
EPA
IAWG
NPDES
PSDDA
PSEP
PSWQA
RCRA
Superfund
PROGRAM NAMES
Citizens Advisory Committee
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Department of Ecology
Everett Harbor Action Team
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Interagency Work Group
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (EPA/Ecology)
Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis Program
Puget Sound Estuary Program (EPA/Ecology/PSWQA), including
urban bay action programs such as the Everett Harbor Action
Program
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
EPA and Ecology programs under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act to clean up hazardous
waste sites or other areas of toxic contamination
CHEMICAL NAMES
HPAH
LPAH
PAH
PCBs
High molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Low molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Polychlorinated biphenyls
POLLUTANT SOURCE NAMES
cso
Combined sewer overflow. A discharge of raw sewage diluted
with stormwater, which occurs whenever the hydraulic capacity
of a combined sewer line is exceeded.
-------
OTHER TERMS
AET
Amphipod
Benthic
Bioaccumulation
Bioassay
Community
Diversity
Infauna
Invertebrates
Lesion
Loading
Nonpoint Source
Sediment
Toxic Contamination
Apparent effects threshold. Chemical concentrations in sediments
above which a particular adverse biological effect is expected
to be statistically significant (P<0.05) relative to appropriate
reference conditions.
A small organism that superficially resembles a shrimp and
lives on the sea bottom. Amphipods are used in laboratory
bioassays to test the toxicity of sediments.
Pertaining to the bottom of a body of water
The accumulation of a substance in tissues of an organism.
Bioaccumulation of toxic substances may lead to disease or
other health-problems.
A laboratory test used to evaluate the toxicity of a material
(commonly sediments or wastewater) by measuring behavioral or
physiological responses (including death) of organisms.
A group of interacting species populations found within a
defined area.
The number of species in a community, or a mathematical
index of the variety of species that also accounts for the
relative abundance of each species.
Animals living within the bottom sediments.
Animals without backbones.
An abnormal structural change in the body due to injury or
disease (e.g., a liver tumor in fish).
Quantity of a substance that enters a body of water during a
specified time interval (e.g., pounds per year).
A nonspecific source of pollutants, often from a large area
(e.g., stormwater drainage).
Material that settles to the bottom of a body of water or that
collects on the bottom of pipes such as sewers and storm drains.
Presence of toxic substances, often caused by releases of
metals or synthetic organic chemicals to the environment.
VI
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document was prepared by PTI Environmental Services under the direction of
Dr. Robert A. Pastorok for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in partial
fulfillment of Contract No. 68D80085. This project was funded through the National
Estuary Program under the authority of the Clean Water Act as amended. Funding was
approved by the EPA Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection. An earlier draft of
this report was prepared under contract to Tetra Tech, Inc. for EPA. Dr. Jean Jacoby
was the technical monitor for Tetra Tech, Inc. Dr. Lawrence McCrone, Ms. Clare
Ryan, Ms. Martha Burke, and Dr. John Armstrong served as technical monitors for
EPA Region 10 throughout various phases of the project.
The primary authors of this report are Mr. Pieter Booth and Dr. Robert Pastorok
of PTI Environmental Services. Dr. Thomas Ginn of PTI provided technical review
comments.
The Everett Harbor Action Program has benefited from the participation of an
Interagency Work Group and a Citizens Advisory Committee. Duties of the Everett
Harbor Interagency Work Group and Citizens Advisory Committee members included the
following: 1) reviewing program documents, agency policies, and proposed actions; 2)
providing data reports and other technical information to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; and 3) disseminating information to interest groups or constitu-
encies. The past and continuing efforts of the Everett Harbor Interagency Work Group
and Citizens Advisory Committee members are greatly appreciated. Special thanks are
due to Ms. Joan Thomas, Mr. David Murdock, Mr. David Nunnallee, and Mr. John
Williams for chairing the Everett Harbor Interagency Work Group and to Mr. Gary Wold
for chairing the Everett Harbor Citizens Advisory Committee. Members of the Everett
Harbor Interagency Work Group and Citizens Advisory Committee are listed below.
Everett Harbor Interagency Work Group
Name Affiliation
Mr. Chuck Dunn U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Ms. Katherine Fletcher Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Dr. Jack Gakstatter U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mr. Dennis Gregoire Port of Everett
Mr. Nathan Jacobson Snohomish Conservation District
Dr. David Jamison Washington Department of Natural Resources
Mr. Edward Long National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Mr. Edward Lukjanowicz U.S. Navy Homeporting Office
Mr. David Peterson Snohomish Health District
Dr. Lawrence McCrone Washington Department of Ecology
Mr. William Moore Mayor of Everett
Mr. David Murdock Washington Department of Ecology
Mr. Thomas Niemann Snohomish County Planning Department
Mr. David Nunnallee Washington Department of Ecology
Mr. Clair Olivers City of Everett
Ms. Sandra O'Neil Washington Department of Fisheries
vn
-------
Name
Affiliation
Everett Harbor Interagency Work Group (continued)
Mr. David Peterson
Ms. Clare Ryan
Mr. Carl Sagerser
Mr. David Somers
Ms. Joan Thomas
Mr. Ron Thomas
Mr. James Thornton
Mr. John Underwood
Mr. Frank Urabeck
Mr. John Williams
Mr. Harry Winder
Mr. William Yake
Lt. Cmdr. Greg Yaroch
Snohomish Health District
Washington Department of Ecology
Washington Department of Social and Health Services
Tulalip Tribes
Washington Department of Ecology
City of Everett
Washington Department of Ecology
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District
Washington Department of Ecology
Port of Everett
Washington Department of Ecology
Port Marine Safety Office
Everett Harbor Citizens Advisory Committee
Name
Mr. Dennis Atkinson
Mr. Timothy Bechtel
Mr. Ronald Brown
Mr. William Brust
Mr. T.M. Burns
Mr. Carl Cady
Mr. Michael Deller
Mr. Alan Friedman
Ms. Anne Grubb
Ms. Lorena Havens
Mr. James Heil
Mr. Mark Houser
Mr. Peter Hurley
Mr. Henry Krai
Mr. Donald Kusler
Ms. Sally Van Niel
Mr. Gary Wold
Affiliation
Everett Chamber of Commerce
Scott Paper Company
Friends of the Snohomish River
Citizens for Everett's Future
Everett Chamber of Commerce
Weyerhaeuser Company
Snohomish County Economic Development Council
Sierra Club
Pilchuck Audubon Society
Friends of Snohomish Delta
Puget Sound Alliance
Port Gardner Information League
Evergreen Coalition
Everett Mountaineers
Pilchuck Audubon Toxics
Washington Environmental Council
Trout Unlimited
Vlll
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Previous studies of Everett Harbor and the lower Snohomish River have revealed
extensive contamination of sediments by toxic metals such as copper, lead, zinc, and
arsenic, as well as organic compounds such as petroleum products and polychlorinated
biphenyls. Some of these substances may pose hazards to the aquatic ecosystem. For
example, toxic contamination may decrease the abundance and diversity of bottom-
dwelling (benthic) invertebrate communities, increase the prevalence of tissue disorders
such as liver tumors in fish, and result in the accumulation of chemicals in tissues of
fish and shellfish.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington Department of
Ecology (Ecology), working with the City of Everett and others, developed the Urban
Bay Action Program to reduce toxic contamination in urban bays including the Everett
Harbor system. The Everett Harbor Action Program 1) identifies existing areas of
toxic contamination, 2) identifies known and potential sources of toxic contaminants, 3)
establishes schedules for corrective actions to eliminate existing problems and investigate
potential problems, and 4) identifies appropriate agencies for implementing corrective
actions. Corrective actions may include both source controls and sediment remedial actions
(i.e., cleanup), such as capping or removal of contaminated sediments. Source controls
may include permit revisions (or permitting of unpermitted discharges) that require a
reduction of contaminant concentrations or volume of discharges, and application of
best management practices to reduce the contamination of surface runoff.
Priority problem areas were identified by analyzing data on chemical contamination
and biological effects (PTI and Tetra Tech 1988). Areas received a high priority
ranking if they exhibited particularly high levels of chemical contamination or biological
effects, such as high prevalence of liver tumors among bottom-dwelling fish, or very low
abundances of benthic invertebrate species. Known and potential contaminant sources
were documented for each priority problem area and for the project area in general.
This 1989 Action Plan focuses on controlling documented sources in priority problem
areas. Generally, sources should be controlled prior to conducting sediment remediation
to prevent or minimize recontamination of cleaned-up areas.
The 1989 Action Plan requires the coordinated action of many regulatory and
management organizations in the Interagency Work Group to address particular problem
areas and specific sources of contamination. In addition to the Interagency Work
Group, business, industry, environmental, and citizen groups are represented in the
Everett Harbor Citizens Advisory Committee. The Citizens Advisory Committee was
consulted to provide direct input into all stages of program development.
The 1989 Action Plan is being carried out through the existing regulatory and
resource management mechanisms of federal, state, and local government agencies. Ecology
has assigned funding for one full-time employee to form the nucleus of a regional task
force, the Everett Harbor Action Team, whose purpose is to identify and recommend
controls for contaminant sources.
The regulatory and management efforts of the 1989 Action Plan focus on priority
problem areas located in East Waterway, along the south Port Gardner shoreline near
Mukilteo, and near industrial and marina areas of the Snohomish River.
IX
-------
The 1989 Action Plan is a working document designed to be refined as new data
are made available. The Everett Harbor Interagency Work Group will be responsible
for updating and implementing the 1989 Action Plan. The Interagency Work Group will
continue to meet on a regular basis (at least quarterly) to review progress made on
implementation of the plan, resolve any problems, and refine the plan to reflect new information.
-------
INTRODUCTION
In response to widespread concern over the environmental health of Puget Sound,
several agencies with regulatory, resource management, and research responsibilities
joined forces in 1985 to initiate the Puget Sound Estuary Program (PSEP). A primary
objective of this program is to minimize toxic chemical contamination of Puget Sound
to protect fish, shellfish, wildlife, and other living resources. Inner harbors and
waterways of Puget Sound, because of their poor flushing characteristics, are easily
contaminated by toxic chemicals released into the sound or its drainage basin as a
result of human activities. For example, localized areas of high contamination and
associated biological effects have been found near discharges from industrial facilities,
sewage treatment plants, and urban storm drains.
As a primary element of PSEP, the Urban Bay Action Program focuses on identifying
and reducing contaminant releases through a series of coordinated actions by government
agencies and private parties (e.g., industries and businesses). Pollution control activities
may include improvement of drainage or treatment systems for stormwater and sewage;
implementation and, where appropriate, revision of permit conditions for wastewater
dischargers; enforcement of hazardous materials regulations; and implementation of best
management practices or cleanup measures at sites of concern.
The 1989 Action Plan for the Everett Harbor Action Program is described in this
report. The corrective actions developed for specific sites within the Everett Harbor
project area are organized according to problem areas identified in Analysis of Toxic
Problem Areas (PTI and Tetra Tech 1988). For each priority problem area and associated
contaminant source, the plan specifies the status of discharges and corrective actions,
recommended additional corrective actions, agencies responsible for implementing those
actions, and approximate implementation schedules. The remainder of this introduction
provides background information on the project area, a description of the Everett
Harbor Action Program, and a summary of the technical approach used to evaluate
priority problem areas and contaminant sources.
OVERVIEW OF EVERETT HARBOR AND ITS TOXIC CONTAMINATION PROBLEMS
The Everett Harbor project area, located adjacent to the eastern portion of
Possession Sound in the north-central Puget Sound region, includes Port Gardner and
the lower Snohomish River estuary (Figure 1). For the purpose of this program, Everett
Harbor is defined as the area east of a line joining Elliott Point in Mukilteo with the
western point of Mission Beach at the entrance of Tulalip Bay. The Snohomish River
delta and the estuary east to Interstate 5 are within the project area.
The Snohomish River, which discharges into the eastern portion of Port Gardner,
is the major source of fresh water to the project area and to north-central Puget
Sound. Within the project area, the Snohomish River estuary includes four main branches:
Ebey Slough, Steamboat Slough, Union Slough, and the lower Snohomish River channel.
The Snohomish River channel carries the major portion of the river's flow. During the
dry season, tidal saltwater intrusions have been observed as far upstream as 11 kilometers
from Preston Point. The Snohomish River delta and associated sloughs and wetlands
together provide one of the most biologically rich habitats in Puget Sound. Living
-------
PROPOSED U.S. NAVY
HOMEPORT SITE
PSDDA UNCONFINED
AQUATIC DISPOSAL SITE
U.S. NAVY PREVIOUSLY
PROPOSED DEEP CONFINED
AOUATC DISPOSAL SITE
PREVIOUS DREDGED
MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
MUKILTEO
Elliott Point
Figure 1. Everett Harbor and lower Snohomish River project area
-------
resources of Everett Harbor include commercially and recreationally harvested salmon
and steelhead, abundant Dungeness crab populations, several species of perch and
bottomfish, and intertidal clams.
In the early 1900s, a dike was built to divert Snohomish River flows southward
along the Everett shoreline and to provide a channel for a freshwater port. A second
dike was constructed from the shore to form the East Waterway. Historical as well as
recent maritime and industrial activities have centered largely around the East Waterway
and along the shoreline northward to Preston Point. At present, wastewater outfalls of
major pulp and paper industries are located in the East Waterway, Steamboat Slough, and
Port Gardner. The depth of the Port Gardner outfall is approximately 100 meters.
The discharge from the city of Everett wastewater treatment plant enters the Snohomish
River approximately 1.6 kilometers downriver of the Interstate 5 bridge. Other sewage
discharges are located just offshore of Mukilteo (from the city of Mukilteo), in Ebey
Slough (from the town of Marysville) and offshore from Mission Beach (from the
Tulalip Indian Reservation). Historical activities may also have contributed contaminants
to the Everett Harbor area. For example, in the late 1800s there were several industries
along the Everett-Port Gardner waterfront, including a smelter with an arsenic concentrating
facility, a wood preserving plant, several lumber mills, a steel barge works, and a pulp
and paper mill.
The watershed draining to the project area encompasses about 280 square kilometers
of primarily forested and agricultural lands within the Snohomish River basin. Surface
water runoff from parts of Everett is collected by a combined sanitary and storm
sewer system and treated at the Everett aerated lagoon wastewater treatment plant.
Combined sewer overflows (CSOs) occur at several locations during wet weather conditions
when the volume of stormwater and municipal wastewater (sewage) exceeds the flow
capacity of the collection and treatment system. There are no CSOs in Marysville and
Mukilteo because these cities have storm drain systems that are separated from the
sewage collection systems. Most of the runoff from Mukilteo and southwest Everett
enters directly into many small streams that discharge to southern Port Gardner. The
northern portion of the project watershed is largely composed of forested and agricultural
lands that drain to Quilceda Creek and Allen Creek (east of Interstate 5 on Ebey Slough).
As a result of urban and industrial influences, localized areas of nearshore Port
Gardner and the lower Snohomish River have been contaminated by toxic chemicals.
Investigations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, the Port of Everett, and the U.S. Navy have revealed
harmful levels of toxic chemicals in sediments on the bottom of the bay and river.
The discrete locations of pollutant discharges result in patches of toxic sediments that
are among some of the most contaminated areas in Puget Sound. The contaminants include
potential carcinogens, such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH), and toxic resin acids and chlorinated organic compounds associated
with wastewater from pulp and paper manufacturers.
In comparison with other contaminated embayments of Puget Sound, such as
Elliott Bay and Commencement Bay where contaminated areas are more widespread, the
severely contaminated areas of the Everett Harbor system are highly localized, occurring
mainly within the East Waterway and near Mukilteo. Liver tumors were found in
approximately 9 percent of English sole (a bottom-dwelling fish) caught in contaminated
areas of Everett Harbor, whereas these lesions are usually absent in fish caught in
relatively uncontaminated areas of the sound. In addition, populations of invertebrate
animals living in the bottom sediments were severely reduced in highly contaminated areas.
-------
EVERETT HARBOR ACTION PROGRAM
In January 1985, PSEP member agencies initiated the Everett Harbor Action
Program. This program was built partly on the past and continuing environmental
programs of the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), the Port of Everett, the
city of Everett, and others.
Through a process of interagency coordination, local government support, and
public participation, the Everett Harbor Action Program has focused new and continuing
pollution control efforts on priority problem areas. The objectives of the Everett
Harbor Action Program include the following:
Identify specific toxic areas of concern in sediments of the project area
based on chemical contamination and associated adverse biological effects
Identify historical and ongoing sources of contamination
Rank toxic problem areas and sources (to the extent possible) in terms
of priority for development of corrective actions
Implement corrective actions to reduce or eliminate sources of ongoing
pollution and restore polluted areas to support natural resources and
beneficial uses.
The Everett Harbor Action Program has followed a process in which corrective
actions are developed and implemented in phases to take advantage of new scientific
data and emerging ideas about practical solutions to toxic contamination problems
(Figure 2). First, existing data on sediment contamination and biological effects were
analyzed, and priority problem areas were identified (Tetra Tech 1985a). Second, data
gaps were filled by further sampling and analysis (PTI and Tetra Tech 1988; Tetra Tech
1988). Finally, based on the results of the first steps of the program, the 1989 Action
Plan was developed to determine priorities for corrective actions. The 1989 Action
Plan may be revised in the future as new data become available to refine the definition
of environmental problem areas and contaminant sources.
Sediment remedial actions and environmental monitoring are potential long-term
components of the Everett Harbor Action Program. Examples of sediment remedial
activities include capping contaminated sediments with clean materials or removing
contaminated sediments by dredging. Generally, source controls should be implemented
before remedial actions are taken on sediments to avoid recontamination of an area
that has been cleaned up. Moreover, sediment remediation is an expensive and complex
process that requires considerable site-specific data and review of environmental effects
during the planning process. To determine the best course of action, regulatory and
resource management agencies must evaluate the environmental benefits and risks of
alternative sediment remedial actions relative to costs. Monitoring is conducted to
evaluate the effectiveness of source control and sediment remediation (Figure 2).
Implementation of Action Plans
The 1989 Action Plan serves as a blueprint for field investigations, permit review,
site cleanup, and other activities intended to control pollutant sources. Activities
specified in the action plan are to be carried out through the coordinated efforts of a
-------
s
A
M
P
L
I
N
G
A
N
D
A
N
A
L
Y
S
INITIAL PROBLEM
IDENTIFICATION
SEDIMENT
MANAGEMENT
POTENTIAL ACTION
TEAM ACTIVITIES
SOURCE CONTROL
PERMITTING
INSPECTIONS
ENFORCEMENT
SEDIMENT REMEDIAL
PLANNING
ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING PROGRAM
ACTION PROGRAM
EVALUATION
Figure 2. Elements of the Everett Harbor Action Program.
-------
regional task force, the Everett Harbor Action Team (EHAT), and several agencies and
other organizations. Presently, Ecology has funding for one full-time EHAT member.
Ecology will use its resources primarily for carrying out source control actions. Such
actions will include, but are not limited to, the following: issuing permits; performing
facilities inspections, contaminated site assessments, site investigations, and site cleanup;
enforcing existing regulations; and assisting in the development of educational programs.
Other important activities of Ecology and EHAT include the following:
Involvement in the coordination of sediment remedial work (e.g., capping
in situ contaminated sediments or dredging contaminated sediments
followed by upland disposal)
Oversight and coordination of 1989 Action Plan activities for which local
jurisdictions are primarily responsible
Source identification, including performing field evaluations and sampling
and analysis, and responding to public complaints
Coordination with Ecology's industrial section on matters concerning
key permits
Organization and chairing of quarterly Interagency Work Group meetings
for Action Plan review and update, and preparation and distribution of
meeting minutes.
Regulatory authority for EHAT stems primarily from Ecology, which is responsible
for issuing discharge permits (including permits for storm drains) and conducting site
inspections under state water pollution control laws and regulations, the federal Clean
Water Act, and hazardous substance control programs. Major regulatory responsibility
also lies with the City of Everett, which owns and operates lift stations, pump stations,
regulators, and a sewage treatment plant. The City of Everett is responsible for
issuing and enforcing permits for discharges from industrial or commercial facilities to
the sanitary sewer system. The City of Everett also owns and maintains storm drain
and sewer collection systems. Under various environmental regulations, other agencies
(e.g., the Port of Everett) and private industries are responsible for pollution prevention
and abatement related to their property and activities, including control of storm drain
discharges.
Past Accomplishments
EPA funded the development of the Everett Harbor Action Program in January
1985. In 1985, EPA presented draft reports of the guidelines for defining toxic problem
areas based on measures of contamination and biological effects, initial assessment of
problem areas based on available data (Tetra Tech 1985a), and the sampling and analysis
design for further investigations to fill data gaps (Tetra Tech 1985b).
The Interagency Work Group (IAWG) and the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
were formed in 1985 to contribute to the technical development of the program and to
develop the action plan. The IAWG was composed of representatives from federal, state,
and local government agencies, and the CAC was composed of representatives from business
organizations, industries in the study area, and environmental groups, as well as residents
of the Everett area who are interested in the reduction of contaminant inputs to the river
-------
and harbor. Duties of the Everett Harbor IAWG and CAC members included: 1) reviewing
program documents, agency policies, and proposed actions; 2) providing data reports
and other technical information to EPA; and 3) disseminating action program information
to respective interest groups or constituencies.
Ecology funded EHAT in September 1985. Between September 1985 and September
1987, EHAT, in conjunction with EPA, other groups at Ecology, and local government
agencies, performed a variety of source control actions and initiated several investigations,
including:
Issuing notices of violation to two area industries discharging process water
to Everett's sanitary sewer
Initiating hazardous waste investigations (with Snohomish County) at
Paine Field
Conducting source evaluation investigations at two waterfront facilities
Conducting an investigation at the Tulalip landfill
Participating in ongoing investigations at the Mukilteo Defense Fuel Supply
Depot (Ryan 1987).
TECHNICAL APPROACH
During late 1986, EPA conducted field surveys to collect data in support of the
Everett Harbor Action Program. The field surveys were designed to provide an assessment
of environmental contamination and effects (PTI and Tetra Tech 1988) and an initial
evaluation of potential contaminant sources (Tetra Tech 1988). This section describes
the approach used to identify and rank problem areas in terms of priority for action
and the approach used to evaluate potential contaminant sources.
Identification and Ranking of Problem Areas
The five types of environmental indicators (Figure 3) used to identify and rank problem
areas are:
Sediment Chemistry
Contaminant concentrations
Apparent effects thresholds (AET), which are chemical concentrations
in sediments above which a particular adverse biological effect is
expected to be statistically significant (P<0.05) relative to appropriate
reference conditions
Bioaccumulation
Pesticide, PCB, and mercury concentrations in muscle tissue of
English sole
-------
Pb
ci
Cl
C =
ICHEMISTRYl
SEDIMENTS |
iBIOASSAYSl
BIOACCUMULATION
LIVER DISEASE
Figure 3. Environmental indicators used to define problem areas
of sediment contamination and biological effects.
-------
Sediment Bioassays
Amphipod mortality (10-day bioassay)
Oyster larvae abnormality
Benthic Infauna Abundances
Polychaete abundance
Crustacean abundance
Pelecypod abundance
Gastropod abundance
Fish Pathology
Lesion (e.g., tumor) prevalence in livers of English sole.
The rationale for using the five kinds of environmental indicators is provided in Tetra
Tech (1985a) and Tetra Tech (1986). Puget Sound AET were used as sediment quality
values to evaluate chemical data relative to predicted biological effects. Because AET
are predictive, they were especially useful in interpreting historical data on sediment
contaminant levels where no synoptic biological data were available. Although many
other variables were evaluated throughout the decision-making process, those shown
above formed the basis for problem identification and priority ranking.
An approach based on a preponderance of evidence was used to identify and rank
problem areas. Study areas that exhibited high values for multiple indicators of contamina-
tion and adverse effects received the highest priority ranking. Priority problem areas
and stations are illustrated in Figure 4. Corrective actions have not been identified in
areas where problem sediments were not found, although source control activities may
be necessary to meet other regulatory requirements. Prioritization of problem areas
based on multiple indicators of chemical contamination and biological effects will
facilitate effective use of resources for pollutant source investigations and remedial actions.
Identification of Potential Contaminant Sources
Potential sources of contamination in the lower Snohomish River and Everett Harbor
include municipal wastewater treatment plants, CSOs, surface runoff, contaminated ground-
water, industrial discharges, atmospheric deposition, and accidental spills. Contaminant
sources in the Everett Harbor project area were identified based on the following: 1)
existing information about past and present activities, and 2) information from site
inspections and discharge permits. Information and some data were available from Ecology
for facilities with permitted or known nonpermitted discharges, facilities contributing
to contamination due to poor housekeeping practices, and sites with groundwater or
soils contamination. Several major CSOs and storm drains were also identified as
contaminant sources.
To better characterize contaminant inputs from CSOs and storm drains, EPA
conducted a screening-level survey in 1986 (see Tetra Tech 1988). During this effort,
sediments were collected from the downstream portions of two CSOs and one storm
drain that discharge directly into the East Waterway. In addition, four groundwater
samples were collected from three monitoring wells at the Mukilteo Defense Fuel
-------
EAST WATERWAY /
PROBLEM AREA *
I
NEARSHORE PORT GARDNER
PROBLEM AREA ^
-^^ «
NOTE: Problem Slatkin« - Criteria lor defining
problem station! an given In PTI and
Tetra Tech (1988).
Problem Areas - Contain several
problem stations. Unes delineating
problem area* are estimated boundaries
based on available data (Including.
historical data) and are not highly
precise. Station* not exceeding the
criteria may exist within problem areas.
Reference: PTI and Tetra Tech (1988).
Figure 4. Problem areas and problem stations in the Everett Harbor
project area.
-------
Supply Depot (an area of groundwater contamination). Samples of groundwater from
the Mukilteo Defense Fuel Supply Depot and samples of sediment from the drains were
analyzed for the same contaminants measured in offshore sediments. Groundwater,
storm drains, and other potential sources were evaluated for their potential contribution
of contaminants to priority problem areas and problem stations identified in Figure 4.
Tetra Tech (1988) evaluated various potential sources based on the following elements:
Proximity of the potential source to the problem station offshore
Similarity of problem chemicals in sediments of drains and in the receiving
environment
Similarity of the relative percent distribution of chemicals within the
drain and in the receiving environment {i.e., percentage composition for
a particular contaminant within a group of related contaminants [e.g.,
low molecular weight PAH (LPAH), high molecular weight PAH (HPAH),
and metals]}
The spatial distribution of contaminants in offshore sediments
Available information on past and ongoing practices possibly contributing
to observed contamination.
Appendix A provides a summary of the source evaluation for each problem area and
problem station as presented by Tetra Tech (1988). The locations of potential sources
of contaminants are shown in Figures 5 and 6.
11
-------
SUHFACE RUNOFF j.bCHAHQE LOCATIONS
CSO
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE EXISTING
.NDUSTRIAL OISCHAHGE - HISTORICAL
TICKSATE
MUNICIPAL WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
EVERETT
WEVERHAEUSER KRAFT
WEYERHAEUSER - WOOD PRODUCTS
ASSOCIATED SAND > GRAVEL
SCOTT/WEVERHAEUSER
WJKLTEO DEFENSE FUEL SUPPLY DEPOT
8URLKGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT
SOURCE (INDUSTRIAL)
BUSE MILL
BUSE LOG DUMP
CENTRECON
MAHPAC
AMERICAN BOIER WORKS
FISHERMAN'S BOAT SHOP
STEUAHT SEAFOOD
CANYON LUMBER
TRUCXCARE
CUSTOM PLATING AND PACIFC PLATING
1 1 * KOHKOKU USA
12* JOHN FLUKE (SEAWAY BLVD)
13* JOHN FLUKE (EVERGREEN WAY)
SEEEASTWATERWAY
SEGMENT MAP
DISCHARGES TO EVERETT WWTP
;SIGNIFCANT INDUSTRIAL USER
SUBJECT TO DISCHARGE PERMIT)
EVERETT
LANDFLL
(TIRE RR
REKOWAY-SNOHOMISH
LANDFLL
Figure 5. Locations of potential sources of contamination in the
Everett Harbor project area.
-------
LEGEND
I
(E)
(S)
(WT)
(SW)
(WG)
O
SURFACE RUNOFF DISCHARGE
cso
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE - EXISTING
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE - HISTORICAL
EVERETT
SCOTT PULP AND PAPER
WEYERHAEUSER - THERMAL/
MECHANICAL
SCOTT/WEYERHAEUSER
WESTERN GEAR
STACK
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT
SOURCE (INDUSTRIAL):
1 FOSS TUG - PAST LOCATION
2 DUNLAP LOG YARD - PAST LOCATION
3 U.S. NAVAL RESERVE C ENTER
4 DUNLAP TOWING
5 JOHNSTON PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
(MOBILE OIL COMPANY)
6 EVERETT COLD STORAGE
7 FOSS TUG -PRESENT LOCATION
8 DUNLAP LOG YARD -PRESENT LOCATION
DRAIN SAMPLING STATIONS
(TETRATECH 1968)
NORTON TERMINAL
(PROPOSED U.S. NAVY
HOMEPORTSITE)
+NORTON
WG003n TERMINAL
IB-T STORM
> DRAIN
SOUTH TERMINAL
(PORT OF EVERETT)
SW001
WEYERHAEUSER
SULFITE/THERMOMECHANICAL
(closed)
Figure 6. Locations of drain sampling stations, industrial
discharge outfalls, CSOs, and storm drains in
the East Waterway study area.
13
-------
1989 ACTION PLAN FOR EVERETT HARBOR
Many planned or ongoing actions to control contaminant inputs to the project area
are part of comprehensive programs or planning activities of federal, state, and local
government agencies. The first part of this section describes these programs. The
second part of this section presents a detailed action plan for controlling contaminant
discharges to priority problem areas.
COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMS AND PLANS
The following programs and plans are described in terms of actions that can be
taken to identify or control ongoing sources of contamination to the project area.
Programs and plans are organized by major implementing agency or local government body.
Programs and plans addressing remediation of contaminated sediment statewide are
presently under development by Ecology. In addition to potential future plans for sediment
remediation, contaminated sediment removal may occur incidentally, as a result of
dredging in navigation channels by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) or dredging
by the U.S. Navy, the Port of Everett, or other shoreline property owners or tenants.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Superfund
In addition to the Urban Bay Action Program, EPA programs under the federal
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund, as
amended) may result in activities to solve toxic contamination problems in the project
area. Under Superfund, EPA, Ecology, responsible parties, or potentially responsible parties
investigate the extent of contamination in environmental media, assess chemical risks
to human health and the environment, and design and implement cleanup actions to
reduce or eliminate risks at hazardous waste sites of national priority.
Currently, there are no National Priorities List sites in the project area. However,
site discovery programs under Superfund may contribute to source identification efforts
of other agencies. The following Everett area sites are currently in the Superfund
Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation Law Information System
database for potential site discovery, assessments, or other actions: Boeing Commercial
Airplane Company, Everett Landfill, Pallister Paint, Scott Paper Company, Simpson Lee
Company Pulp/Deinking Plant (closed), Snohomish County Reckoway Landfill, Weyerhaeuser
Sulfite Pulp Mill (closed), Lake Stevens Landfill, Berringer Berry Farm, Boeing Company
Tulalip test site, Tulalip landfill, and Mukilteo Defense Fuel Supply Depot.
Proposed U.S. Navy Homeport for a Carrier Battle Group
The U.S. Navy proposes to construct and operate a carrier battle group homeport
at the Norton Avenue Terminal in Everett. New facilities, including berthing space,
are to be constructed, requiring the dredging of sediments in the vicinity of the East
Waterway. The Navy had initially planned to dispose of contaminated sediments at a
deep site in Port Gardner (see Figure 1), capping them with uncontaminated sediments
dredged from other portions of the project area. As a result of an appeal of the COE
14
-------
dredging permit for this project by a group of environmental organizations, the plan to
employ confined aquatic disposal for the contaminated sediments was dropped.
The in-water portion of the homeport construction project has three independent
elements, each requiring a separate environmental assessment. Element 1 will accommodate
the carrier Nimitz arid six support vessels at the South Mole Wharf and a new Carrier
Pier. A COE dredging permit for Element 1 will be applied for during the summer of
1989, with dredging to begin by the end of 1989. This dredging is expected to required
the disposal of approximately 975,000 cubic yards of sediments. These sediments, from
the less contaminated portion of the harbor, will nevertheless be subjected to a 3-tier
analysis (i.e., review of existing data, bulk chemical analysis, and acute bioassays)
required by the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) program, as well as
additional analyses (i.e., bulk chemical analyses for polar organics, and sublethal bioassays)
to determine the appropriate disposal option. If these sediments are found to be
suitable for unconfined open-water disposal, then they may be disposed of at the PSDDA
site in Port Gardner (see Figure 1), at the previously proposed confined aquatic disposal
site in Port Gardner (see Figure 1), or at an approved upland site, subject to negotiations
between the state and the Navy. If these sediments are found to be unsuitable for
unconfined open-water disposal, then they will be disposed of at an approved upland site
(with an option to store them for up to 5 years on the Navy property). Completion of
Element 1 is scheduled for the summer of 1992.
Elements 2 and 3 of the homeport project will involve construction of additional
berthing facilities and additional dredging, including dredging of contaminated sediments
from the East Waterway. One option under consideration for disposal of these sediments
is to construct an earthen berm in the inner portion of the East Waterway, dispose of
the contaminated sediments inside this berm, and cover these sediments with a cap of
clean fill material. Further details of Elements 2 and 3, including the selected sediment
disposal option, will be specified at a later date.
Washington Department of Ecology
In addition to the Urban Bay Action Program, Ecology has a number of ongoing
programs and planning activities related to toxic contamination in the Everett Harbor
project area. Programs that are most directly related to the control of toxic contaminants
are described below.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)--Permits are generally
issued on a site-by-site basis and can include more than one discharge or source of
pollutants. Permits for municipal wastewater treatment plants cover sewage system
discharges throughout the plant's service area. Industrial permits may include requirements
for storm drain control (for surface runoff) and wastewater discharge control. NPDES
permits may specify effluent limits (concentration or total loading) for toxic contaminants
and may include provisions for instituting best management practices to reduce nonpoint
contaminant inputs.
There are three NPDES-permitted facilities in the project area: Mukilteo Defense
Fuel Supply Depot, Weyerhaeuser Kraft Mill, and Scott Pulp and Paper Mills (Tetra Tech
1988). New NPDES regulations require property owners and tenants in certain land use
categories to submit data regarding surface water runoff. Ecology is reviewing this
information to assess the need for issuing stormwater permits for selected facilities.
15
-------
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)--The joint EPA/Ecology RCRA
program governs the generation, handling, and disposal of hazardous wastes. Spill
prevention and containment measures, material handling requirements, groundwater
monitoring, and site cleanup can be required as part of a RCRA permit.
Sediment Standards DevelopmentEcology has been a lead agency or key participant
in several efforts to develop tools for evaluating and managing contaminated sediment
(e.g., Commencement Bay Superfund project, PSDDA, Urban Bay Action Program, and
Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan). Ecology is currently developing sediment
quality standards, effluent particulate controls, standards for confined disposal of
dredged material, and remedial action (i.e., cleanup) guidelines. In addition, guidelines
for unconfined disposal of dredged material have been developed under PSDDA in an
interagency effort led by the COE.
Snohomish Conservation District
Snohomish Conservation District is responsible for providing planning assistance to
farmers in Snohomish County. The district's main source of funding for this task is a
4-year grant from Ecology. The grant specifies that the district work within the boundaries
of the Snohomish River watershed. The scope of work for this effort consists of the
following four major elements:
Inventory existing commercial livestock operations
Provide conservation planning assistance on a voluntary basis to livestock
operations, with an emphasis on reducing agricultural nonpoint source
pollution
Provide technical assistance to implement conservation plans for livestock
operations
Provide information-sharing and educational services on improving water
quality to commercial and small farm operators.
The Everett Harbor Action Plan identifies Quilceda Creek and Allen Creek as
potential sources of agricultural nonpoint contamination. These streams are within the
boundaries of the Snohomish River watershed and are part of the Conservation District's
planning responsibility. The Conservation District has completed an inventory of
livestock operations, and has identified 14 dairies within the Quilceda Creek and Allen
Creek drainages. Conservation plans have been completed for 2 of the 14 dairies and
the remaining dairy operators have been encouraged to participate in conservation
planning activities. In addition, the Conservation District assisted in the installation of
winter manure storage facilities at five dairies in the Quilceda Creek and Allen Creek
drainages.
The Conservation District publishes the Snohomish Conservation News, which
encourages farmers to get involved in improving water quality by adopting agricultural
best management practices and participating in ongoing watershed planning activities.
All commercial and noncommercial livestock operators in Snohomish County receive
Snohomish Conservation News.
16
-------
The Snohomish River watershed project is funded by Ecology through 1990. After
1990, local funding support will be essential for continuation of the program.
Snohomish Health District
The Snohomish Health District is responsible for the protection of public health in
Snohomish County, including all incorporated cities and towns. As a regulatory agency,
the Health District's mandated responsibilities include enforcing solid waste disposal
regulations and monitoring existing solid waste facilities, permitting upland disposal
sites for dredged material, and permitting private onsite sewage treatment systems.
Other important activities and responsibilities of the Snohomish Health District include
the following:
Participation on the Snohomish County Solid Waste Committee, the City
of Everett's Solid Waste Committee and Wastewater Disposal Committee,
and the Snohomish County Watershed Advisory Committee
A notification program to educate the public about possible health
risks associated with the harvesting of shellfish and bottomfish in
Everett Harbor
Operation of a drinking water certification laboratory
Public assistance concerning household hazardous waste and small
quantity waste generators.
City of Everett
The City of Everett has three programs to reduce contaminant inputs to the
Everett Harbor project area: the CSO control plan, the industrial pretreatment program,
and ongoing activities at the sewage treatment facility.
Combined Sewer Overflow Control Plan--The City of Everett developed a CSO
control plan in 1987 (CWC-HDR and Ott Water Engineers 1987) in response to the
requirements of Ecology. The city's 10-year implementation plan includes installing a
new interceptor line from Port Gardner to the Snohomish River, constructing a south-
end interceptor line, implementing a program to identify and control inflows to the
south-end system, constructing a siphon and oxidation pond in the Snohomish River
area, achieving stormwater/sewer separation at three Snohomish River CSOs, and
constructing a Snohomish River interceptor (CWC-HDR and Ott Water Engineers 1987).
CSOs are currently monitored by the city to determine their frequency and intensity
for the purpose of establishing CSO control priorities. A plan approved by Ecology
provides that control efforts for CSOs discharging to the sound (i.e., E006, E007, E008,
E009, E011, E012, and E013) will not begin until at least 1993. The city will concentrate
CSO control efforts on the Snohomish River where CSO volumes are at least ten times
greater (Thomas, R., 14 November 1988, personal communication).
Industrial Pretreatment Program--The City of Everett has developed and implemented
an industrial pretreatment program, which includes industrial waste surveys, discharge
limitations, a monitoring enforcement system, and a public participation program. As
17
-------
of September 1988, the city had identified industries needing permits and had issued
permits to two facilities (Thomas, R., 24 August 1988, personal communication). As of
November 1988, the city had drafted permits for Kohkoku, Inc.; Centrecon, Inc.; Cathcart
Landfill; Stewart Seafoods; Boeing, Inc.; Pacific Plating; Custom Pacific Plating; and
Truckcare, Inc. (Thomas, R., 14 November 1988, personal communication). These permits
are currently being reviewed by Ecology.
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant--The City of Everett has conducted studies
of 1) an alternative outfall site and addition of a flow-paced chlorination system for
effluent disinfection and 2) ambient lead concentrations in the Snohomish River. The
city has constructed recirculation channels for the existing lagoons. Sediment will be
removed from the aeration cells by mid-1989. The city will design and construct a
mechanical treatment plant by 1991 (Thomas, R., 24 August 1988, personal communication).
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (PSWQA) is a state agency mandated to
develop a comprehensive plan for water quality protection in Puget Sound for implementation
by existing state and local governments. The 1989 Puget Sound Water Quality Management
Plan, released in November 1988, builds on elements and goals set out in the 1987
Puget Sound Plan (PSWQA 1988). The 1989 plan delineates criteria, guidelines, sources
of funding, management strategies, budgets, and schedules for 10 programs relating to
nonpoint source pollution control, shellfish protection, municipal and industrial discharges,
contaminated sediments and dredging, stormwater and combined sewer overflows, laboratory
support, wetlands protection, oil spill prevention and response planning, household
hazardous waste, and legal and personnel support.
In addition, the 1989 plan identifies three new initiatives (i.e., for monitoring, research,
and education and public involvement) and a 14-item unfinished agenda. Implementation
of the plan has resulted in the adoption of new state regulations and the formation of
state and local programs that are important to the Everett Harbor Action Program
(e.g., watershed planning). Of most importance to the Everett Harbor Action Program
are the requirements for Ecology to develop and adopt sediment quality standards,
enhance the control of contaminant discharges from permitted facilities, and develop a
stormwater control program.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
The COE conducts regular maintenance dredging in the Snohomish River navigation
channel and settling basins every 2 years. In addition, the COE is one of the principal
agencies in Puget Sound regulating the dredging and disposal of dredged material (including
contaminated sediment). The COE is the lead agency for PSDDA. Other major participants
in the program are the Washington Department of Natural Resources, EPA, and Ecology.
The primary objectives of PSDDA are to 1) identify acceptable sites for the open-
water unconfined disposal of dredged material, 2) define dredged material evaluation
procedures for sediments that are being considered for disposal at the PSDDA sites,
and 3) formulate management plans for disposal sites. Phase I of PSDDA, completed in
18
-------
December 1988, focuses on central Puget Sound (including Everett Harbor). The PSDDA
unconfined aquatic disposal site for Port Gardner has been established (see Figure 1).
As of February 1989, no permits have been issued. Phase II deals with the remainder
of Puget Sound and is expected to be completed by Fall 1989.
Port of Everett
Planned expansion of port facilities may incidentally result in the remediation
(i.e., removal) of contaminated sediment. By 1989, the Port of Everett plans to demolish
the shoreline area now occupied by a dock on the old Weyerhaeuser property (South
Terminal). This project may create an opportunity for the nearshore or upland-confined
disposal of an estimated 3,800 cubic meters of contaminated sediment from the East
Waterway problem area.
Paine Field Cleanup Committee
The Paine Field Cleanup Committee was formed in 1987 to assess hazardous waste-
related problems and oversee their solution. This interagency group is composed of
representatives from Ecology, Snohomish County Airport, Olympus Terrace Sewer District,
Snohomish Health District, Snohomish County Safety Department, and the COE. This
group supervised the sampling and analysis of approximately 120 underground storage
tanks in 1987 and 1988 and is coordinating various other investigations and cleanup
efforts, including sampling and disposal of drums, installation and sampling of groundwater
monitoring wells, sampling and removal of underground storage tanks, mapping the
storm drain and sanitary sewer system, and managing landfill operations.
SITE-SPECIFIC ACTION PLAN
Table 1 presents the 1989 Action Plan for EH AT and associated agencies. Problem
areas and problem stations correspond to those defined in PTI and Tetra Tech (1988).
Figure 4 above illustrates the locations of problem areas and problem stations in the
Everett Harbor project area. (Problem Station SD-03 does not appear in Table 1
because there are no known potential sources associated with the area sampled.)
Sources listed in Table 1 are those identified in Evaluation of Potential Contaminant
Sources (Tetra Tech 1988) and those identified by members of the IAWG. The actions
and personnel specified in Table 1 reflect information and commitments from IAWG
members. The implementation dates document actual and projected start/finish dates
for each action.
19
-------
TABLE 1. SITE-SPECIFIC ACTION PLAN FOR EVERETT HARBOR PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS
Problem Areas & Stations
Potential
Source
Action
Responsible
Entity
Implementation
Date
K>
O
East Waterway Problem Area Norton Terminal storm drain
Scott Pulp and Paper
Anaconda Aluminum Dome
Everett Cold Storage
Mobil Oil Co.
Dunlap Towing
Everett Terminal Company
U.S. Naval Reserve
CSO E011, E008, E009, E006, and E0073
Nearshore Port Gardner Problem Area Defense Fuel Supply Depot
Mukilteo wastewater treatment plant
Powdermill Gulch
Develop an approach for addressing infiltration of
contaminants.
Perform a Class II inspection and modify permit to include
toxic chemical control if necessary.
Inspect site and issue permit if needed.
Inspect site and issue permit if needed.
Inspect site and issue permit if needed.
Inspect site and issue permit if needed.
Inspect site and issue permit if needed.
Issue NPDES permits for storm drains.
To be eliminated
Work with EPA personnel to institute remedial activities
(e.g., product recovery). Remedial investigation in progress.
Construct pump station and transfer effluent to Olympus
Terrace sewage treatment plant
Implement drainage basin plan, including sampling.
Conduct a reconnaissance survey for surface drainage
sources.
Conduct an investigation of past disposal practices and land
use.
Japanese Gulch
Conduct sampling and analysis to characterize discharge.
Snohomish County Airport - Paine Field Investigate potential sources.
Problem Station OG-01
CSO EOOl/Edgewater Creek"
Scott-Weyerhaeuser deepwater diffuser
Continue activities to characterize, clean up, and prevent
contamination.
Install interceptor sewer to eliminate CSO.
Conduct a Class II inspection and modify permit to include
toxic chemical control if necessary.
Ecology/EHAT
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
EPA
City of Everett
Ecology/EPA
City of Mukilteo
City of Everett
Ecology/EHAT
Ecology Hazardous
Waste Division
Ecology/Water
Quality Investigation
Ecology
Paine Field Cleanup
Committee
City of Everett
Ecology
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
Ongoing
Starting date
-1993
1989
1990
1989
1989
1990
1989
Investigation
Completed 7/88
Ongoing
Completed 1988
1989
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Potential
Problem Areas & Stations Source
Problem Station SR-05 Weyerhaeuser Kraft Mill WK002,
WK004, WK005
Everett wastewater treatment plant
Log storage yards
Problem Station ES-03 Tulalip landfill
Quilceda Creek
Marysville wastewater treatment plant
Boeing test facility
Problem Station SR-07 Marina area
CSOEOl^
CSOEOIS^
Surface runoff
Action
Perform a Class II inspection and modify permit to include
toxic chemical control if necessary.
Conduct a study for alternative outfall site and flow-paced
chlorination system.
Conduct a study on ambient lead levels in the Snohomish
River, including low-flow (summer) conditions.
Implement pretreatment program.
Construct recirculation channels for lagoons and dredge
sediment from aeration cells.
Design and construct mechanical plant.
Inspect site and issue permit if necessary.
Develop financing mechanisms for placing capping material
over landfill.
Sample leachate and receiving water for pathogens.
Continue conservation planning and technical assistance
efforts at dairies, and continue public education/public
involvement effort
Perform a regional detention facility study.
Add eight influent aerators and three grinders.
Investigate possible hazardous waste leachate to Quilceda
Creek.
Investigate potential sources, including pretreatment
permitted facilities, boat repair facilities, storm drains, and
boat basin.
Issue permits
To be eliminated
To be eliminated
Monitor
Responsible
Entity
Ecology
City of Everett/Ecology
City of Everett
City of Everett
City of Everett
City of Everett
Ecology
Tulalip Tribes
Ecology/EHAT, EPA
Snohomish Conservation
District/Tulalip Tribes
Snohomish Conservation
District
City of Marysville
Boeing/Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
City of Everett
City of Everett
Ecology/COE
Implementation
Date
1989
Completed
Completed
Ongoing
6/89
1988-1991
1989
Ongoing
Completed 1988
Ongoing
1990
1990
1989
Completed 1987
1989
1992
1992
1989
" CSO E006-Approximately 100 meters southeast of Pier 1
CSO E007-Approximatery 80 meters southeast of Pier 1
CSO E008-Approximately 100 meters southeast of Pier 3 (at the foot of Hewitt Avenue)
CSO E009-Approximately 300 meters north of Pier 3 (at the foot of 25th Street).
CSO EOll-Approximatery 300 meters north of CSO E009 (at the foot of 23rd Street).
fc CSO EOOl-Adjacent to Eedgewater Creek.
c CSO E012-At the foot of 16th Street in the marina.
d CSO E013-AI the foot of 14th Street in the marina.
-------
REFERENCES
CWC-HDR and Ott Water Engineers. 1987. Combined sewer overflow control plan.
Prepared for the City of Everett. CWC-HDR, Inc., Edmonds, WA.
PSWQA. 1988. 1989 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan. Draft Report.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Seattle, WA.
PTI and Tetra Tech. 1988. Everett Harbor Action Program: analysis of toxic problem
areas. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10,
Office of Puget Sound. PTI Environmental Services and Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Ryan, C. 1987. The Urban Bay Toxics Control Program: action team accomplishments.
Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. 43 pp.
Tetra Tech. 1985a. Everett Harbor Toxics Action Program: initial data summaries and
problem identification. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 10, Office of Puget Sound. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Tetra Tech. 1985b. Sampling and analysis design for development of Everett Harbor
Action Plan. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Office of
Puget Sound. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Tetra Tech. 1986. Everett Harbor Toxics Action Program: review of existing action
plans. Final Report. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region
10, Office of Puget Sound. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Tetra Tech. 1988. Everett Harbor Action Program: evaluation of potential contaminant
sources. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10,
Office of Puget Sound. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Thomas, R. 24 August 1988. Personal Communication (telephone conversation with Mr.
P. Booth, PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA). City of Everett, Everett, WA.
Thomas, R. 14 November 1988. Personal Communication (letter to Mr. J. Williams,
Washington Department of Ecology). City of Everett, Everett, WA.
22
-------
APPENDIX A
SOURCE EVALUATION SUMMARY
-------
SOURCE EVALUATION SUMMARY
This appendix presents a summary of the source evaluations for each high priority
problem area and problem station [Figure 4; see Tetra Tech (1988) for additional informa-
tion].
EAST WATERWAY PROBLEM AREA
Many compounds related to the pulp industry (e.g., resin acids, chlorinated phenols,
and chlorinated guaiacols) were found at elevated concentrations in the sediments of
the East Waterway. The most likely sources of these contaminants are historical and
current discharges from pulp and paper mills. Scott Paper Company and an inactive
Weyerhaeuser: thermomechanical plant located near the East Waterway problem area
have historically discharged effluent in or near the problem area through nine identified
outfalls.
The Scott Paper Company has operated a plant at its East Waterway location since
1930, and currently discharges effluent through a deepwater diffuser (SW001), a nearshore
diffuser (S003), and the secondary treatment plant outfall (S008).
Weyerhauser operated a sulfite-based paper and pulp mill from 1936 until 1975. Before
1951, discharges included untreated wastewater from washing, bleaching, and drying
processes (WT002 and WT003); stormwater runoff and wastewater from limestone cleaning
operations (WT004); and stormwater runoff from other areas of the plant (WT006).
After 1951, most sulfite waste liquor was discharged through the plant's deepwater
diffuser (SW001). In 1975, the plant was converted to the thermomechanical process,
and outfalls WT001 and WT003 were sealed and abandoned. After 1975, outfalls WT004
and WT006 were used only for stormwater discharge. Weyerhaeuser closed operations
at its East Waterway plant in 1980.
Six CSOs and 10 storm drains also discharge to the East Waterway problem area.
Only the Norton Terminal storm drain and CSOs E011 and E007 were sampled during the
1986 source investigation. Analytical results indicate a lack of similarity in problem
chemicals (presence of chemicals and their relative distributions) between the Norton
Terminal storm drain and offshore sediments, suggesting that the storm drain was not a
significant contributor to organic chemical contamination in the East Waterway. However,
the storm drain may have contributed to metals contamination offshore that had not
reached problem levels at the time of sampling (Tetra Tech 1988).
Based on the large number and relative distributions of problem chemicals common
to both CSO E011 and stations in East Waterway, it is likely that CSO E011 has contributed
to chemical contamination of sediments in East Waterway (especially by 4-methylphenol
and PAH). However, the data indicate that there were probably other significant
sources in the vicinity of CSO E011, especially for compounds related to the pulp industry.
Chemical analyses of sediment sampled from CSO E007 indicate that the CSO may
be a source of HPAH and metals to the East Waterway, but is not likely a major source
of 4-methylphenol. The sediment sample from CSO E007 was not analyzed for pulp mill
compounds.
A-l
-------
NEARSHORE PORT GARDNER PROBLEM AREA
Polar organic compounds (e.g., 4-methylphenol, benzole acid, and phenol) were the
major contaminants in the sediments of this problem area. Some stations demonstrated
relatively high concentrations of PAH and PCBs. Potential sources of contamination in
the vicinity of this problem area include the Mukilteo Defense Fuel Supply Depot, the
Mukilteo municipal wastewater treatment plant, and three surface water discharge
points (i.e., Japanese Gulch, Edgewater Creek, and Powder Mill Gulch). Although
ground water samples taken from wells at the Defense Fuel Supply Depot in 1986 were
visibly contaminated with oily substances, chemical analyses yielded only a few target
compounds (i.e., a few metals and PAH) at relatively low concentrations (Tetra Tech 1988).
No data are available for characterizing surface waters discharging to the offshore
Port Gardner problem area. A number of potential sources of contamination are present
in the drainages of the three creeks mentioned above (e.g., abandoned landfills and
dumps, and training areas for firefighting exercises in the Snohomish County Airport/Paine
Field area). An Ecology field investigation of the Paine Field area was underway at
the time of this writing.
PROBLEM STATION OG-01
Station OG-01 was located near the Scott Paper Company diffuser (SW001). This
area was characterized by contamination from 4-methylphenol, PAH, resin acids, and a
cymene isomer. These contaminants have varying degrees of association with the pulp
industry. Outfall SW001 is currently used to discharge effluent from the Scott Paper
Company primary clarifiers. Prior to 1980, the outfall was also used by Weyerhaeuser
for the discharge of a variety of effluents including untreated sulfite waste liquor.
These discharges may have been the source of resin acids in the vicinity of Station
OG-01.
PROBLEM STATION SD-03
Station SD-03 was located in the Snohomish River delta offshore from a historical
Western Gear outfall (WG002). Western Gear specialized in the manufacture of heavy
equipment and machinery for the oil drilling industry, and discharged noncontact cooling
water prior to 1988. Sediments in this area exhibited contamination by benzoic acid,
benzyl alcohol, DDT, and 4-methylphenol. No potential sources for any of the problem
chemicals have been identified. The presence of DDT in sediments from this area may
be due to historical agricultural uses in the Snohomish River drainage basin.
PROBLEM STATION SR-05
Station SR-05 was located in the Snohomish River offshore of the Weyerhaeuser
Kraft Mill. Sediment in this area was contaminated with benzoic acid, 4-methylphenol,
and resin acids. Discharges from one or more Weyerhaeuser outfalls are likely sources
of resin acids and possibly 4-methylphenol. Historical outfall WP001 was upriver of
Station SR-05 and discharged filtration backwash. Outfall WK.002 is slightly downriver
of Station SR-05 and discharges noncontact cooling water. Outfall WK.005 is slightly
downriver and across the river from Station SR-05 and discharges surface runoff from
Smith Island. Outfall WK.001 is on the northwestern side of Smith Island and discharges
A-2
-------
effluent from aerated treatment lagoons. This outfall was probably not a source of
contaminants to the area because of its distance from Station SR-05. Potential sources
of benzoic acid have not been identified.
PROBLEM STATION ES-03
Station ES-03 was located in Ebey Slough southeast of the mouth of Quilceda
Creek. Sediments in this area exhibited contamination from benzoic acid, 4-methylphenol,
and phenol. A potential source of the benzoic acid and phenol contamination is leachate
from the Tulalip landfill, which has been known to contain these contaminants. Wood
waste and treating facilities are present at various locations throughout the lower
Snohomish River and its sloughs, and were possible contributors to the 4-methylphenol
contamination observed at this station. Weyerhaeuser Outfall WK.001 is another potential
source of 4-methylphenol in the vicinity of Station ES-03.
PROBLEM STATION SR-07
Station SR-07 was located near the Everett Marina in the Snohomish River, and was
designated a problem station because of benthic effects. Sediments at Station SR-07
are composed of 96 percent fine-grained material. Fine-grained sediments may be the
cause of the observed benthic effects. Sediments contained elevated concentrations of
tributyltin and sulfides. Other chemicals were not significantly elevated. Tributyltin is
used in marine paints as a biocide and may have originated from boat painting and
refinishing activities in the marina area. Potential sources of sulfides in this area
have not been identified.
PROBLEM STATION SD-01
Station SD-01 was located in the Snohomish River delta, and was designated a
problem station because of benthic effects. Sediments in the area contained 12 percent
gravel, less than 5 percent fine-grained material, and low concentrations of organic
carbon and sulfide. No significantly elevated concentrations of problem chemicals were
observed at this station. Benthic effects observed in this area may be the result of
natural physical stresses such as those caused by swift currents in the area rather than
chemical contamination (PTI and Tetra Tech 1988).
A-3
------- |